SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
CIV 1628 of 2026
IN CHAMBERS
IN THE MATTER OF
the Vexatious Proceedings Restriction Act 2002 (WA)
AND IN THE MATTER OF
an Application for Leave under s 6(1)
Applicant:
NICHOLAS NI KOK CHIN
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPLICANT
(Leave Application under s 6(1) VPRA)
A. INTRODUCTION
These submissions are filed in support of the Applicant’s Fifth Application for leave under s 6(1) of the Vexatious Proceedings Restriction Act 2002 (WA) (“VPRA”).
The Application seeks leave to commence proceedings against:
- The State of Western Australia; and
- The Registrar of Titles as nominal defendant under s 201(3) of the Transfer of Land Act 1893 (WA) (“TLA”).
The proposed proceeding concerns:
- the existence, content, and legal effect of a statutory implied easement arising under s 52 of the Property Law Act 1969 (WA) (“PLA”);
- the extinguishment of that easement on 12 February 2016 without lawful authority;
- deprivation of an estate or interest in land within ss 201(1) and 205(1) TLA; and
- consequential loss, including the destruction of 31 items of plant and equipment registered under PPSR No. 20170412006511.
B. THE STATUTORY IMPLIED EASEMENT
1. Existence of the easement
Section 52 PLA creates a statutory implied easement of support, light, and air upon subdivision. Such easements arise automatically and do not depend on notation on the certificate of title.
Affidavit B.1: “Such easements arise automatically and do not depend on notation…”
The annotation “COV 52/98 Vol. 2 p. 93” on WAPC Form 26 (28 April 1998) records the statutory implied easement.
Affidavit B.2.
Mr Silas Kierath, Subdivisions Manager, confirmed by email dated 7 December 2020 that the annotation was added by Landgate as an administrative correction reflecting an existing statutory estate created by s 52.
Affidavit B.3.
The FOI Decision in CACV 88 of 2018 (pp 94–96) further confirms that the statutory implied easement existed at the time of subdivision and was recognised administratively by Landgate.
Affidavit B.4.
2. Extinguishment without lawful authority
The statutory implied easement was extinguished on 12 February 2016 by administrative error in the Titles Office.
Affidavit C.1.
The extinguishment was effected without lawful authority or compliance with the TLA.
Originating Motion C.1(i)–(ii).
The extinguishment deprived the Applicant of an estate or interest in land within the meaning of s 201(1) TLA.
Affidavit D.1.
C. CONTINUOUS PURSUIT SINCE 2016
The Applicant has continuously pursued recognition of the statutory implied easement and deprivation of estate since 2016 through four previous VPRA applications:
- CIV 1973 of 2024 (Lemonis J)
- CIV 1109 of 2026 (Gething J)
- CIV 1279 of 2026 ([2026] WASC 90)
- CIV 1495 of 2026 ([2026] WASC 157)
Affidavit C.2.
Each application was dismissed without determination of the central statutory issue.
Affidavit C.3.
On 5 May 2026, the Acting Principal Registrar granted permission for this Fifth Application to be filed.
Affidavit C.5; Originating Motion Ground 6(b).
D. JURISDICTIONAL ERRORS IN PRIOR DECISIONS
The reasons in [2026] WASC 157 did not address:
- the Form 26 annotation;
- the Kierath email;
- the FOI Decision;
- the PPSR registration;
- the statutory chain of title.
Affidavit E.1.
The judgment did not reconcile the findings of the four previous applications as required by s 6(3)(a) VPRA.
Affidavit E.2.
These omissions constitute jurisdictional error and denial of procedural fairness.
Affidavit E.3.
E. DEPRIVATION OF ESTATE AND QUANTIFIED LOSS
The extinguishment of the statutory implied easement prevented the lawful exercise of rights attached to Unit 1/383, including support, light, air, access, and commercial utility.
Affidavit D.2.
Enforcement of the void Ward Order in MC/PER/CIV 10010/2020 resulted in the removal, sale, or destruction of 31 items of plant and equipment registered under PPSR No. 20170412006511.
Affidavit D
